[Thanks to Luke]"I covered the camera in sweat. I hit it against rocks (unintentionally). The air was often dusty and this dust, by the end of the trip, had worked its way into every nook of the GF1. And yet it performed flawlessly."
-
It was just yesterday I thought about how a camera in front of the face is surely more offensive to people: it's like a half-mechanical predatory beast with a big glass eye, staring at them.
And this is what Craig Mod reports regarding that:
About halfway through the trip I realized something strange was happening — the people I photographed were looking me in the eyes. Indeed, they could see my eyes! I had spent so long traveling with a DSLR strapped to my face that I had forgotten about true eye contact.
For better or worse, a camera without a viewfinder is less intimidating. You are no longer half-human half-camera. You're all human with a tiny play thing in your hand. The GF1 is so compact I don't think people take it seriously. Which is wonderful if you want candid, real photographs. Subjects focus on being human rather than being a subject.
-
Craig critizes the camera for a low-light performance which is mediocre. And I agree. It is a pity, since the reason for a big sensor in a small camera is mainly high-ISO performance (all cameras today do well at 100 and 200 ISO). Unlike Craig, I'd say that the GF1 does quite well until around 800 ISO. But still, to be comparable to DSLRs, it should be doing Quite Well at 1600, which it is not. Let's hope the future brings some developments there.
3 comments:
Try metering a few scenes with the GF1 at ISO 800 and some other DSLR at ISO 800 and see what you get. When I compare against my other cameras, my GF1 consistently calls about 2/3 of a stop less exposure than the others. In other words, it seems like the GF1 ISO values are mislabeled. The GF1's ISO 800 is really more like ISO 1250 on the other camera. While I think the GF1 does lag slightly, I also think it doesn't lag as much as you might think.
Well, nobody has done it much better yet. It was just our hopes were high.
Odd about the exposure, because Craig Mod finds it *over*-exposes by a stop. Me, I haven't found it off.
Anonymous, Based on some tests at DxO Mark I believe you are right on. If you look at the ISO Sensitivity tab comparing the DF1 to the Olympus E-P2, for the same measured ISO the GF1 is set at one lower level than E-P2. Note particularly that while the GF1 doesn't go to ISO 6400, the measured ISO when the GF1 is set to 3200 is actually higher than the E-P2 when set at 6400! So compare the GF1 at ISO 800 with other cameras at ISO 1600 and see what you get.
Post a Comment